February 13, 1975 

The Honorable Mark W. White 

Secretary of State 

Capitol Building 

Austin, Texas 78711 

Dear Secretary White: 

Opinion No. H- 526 

Re: Whether any retired 

judge is required to 

file activities report 

under art. 6252-9b, 

v. T. c. s. 

You have requested our opinion concerning whether retired judges 

must comply with the financial disclosure provisions of article 6252-9b. 

V. T. C. S. 

Section 3(a) of article 6252-9b requires “every elected officer.” to 

file financial statements. Section 2(2)(c) defines “elected officer” in 

part as “a judge of a court of civil appeals, a district court, a court of 

domestic relations, or a juvenile court created by special law,” as does 

section 2(2)(E) concerning persons “appointed to fill a vacancy OCR newly 

created office who, if elected rather than appointed, would be an elective officer as defined [above]. ” 

Section 1 of the Act provides: 

It is the policy of the State of Texas that no 

state officer or state employee shall have any 

interest, financial or otherwise, direct or indirect, or engage in any business transaction 

or professional activity or incur any obligation of any nature which is in substantial conflict with the proper discharge of his duties in 

the public interest. To implement this policy 

and to strengthen the faith and confi,dence of 

the people of ‘Texas in their state government, 

there are provided standards of conduct and 

disclosure requirements to be observed by 

persons owing a responsibility to the people of 

p. 2372 
. - 

The Honorable Mark W. White, page 2 (H-526) 

Texas and the government of the State of Texas 

in the performance of their official duties. It 

is the intent of the legislature that this Act shall 

serve not only as a guide for official conduct of 

these covered persons but also as a basis for 

discipline of those who refuse to abide by its 

terms. 

Section 7 of article 6228b, V. T. C. S., provides in part: 

No person who has heretofore retired under 

the provisions of this Judicial Retirement Act 

shall be considered to have been a judicial officer 

of this State after such retirement, unless such 

person has accepted an assignment by the Chief 

Justice to sit in a court of this state. 

Section 7A(a) of article 622813 provides: 

Any person who has retired under the provisions of this Judicial Retirement Act and who 

within ninety (90) days after such retirement 

accepts an assignment by the Chief Justice of 

the Supreme Court or by a Presiditlg Judge of 

an Administrative Judicial Di,strict shall continue as a judici,al officer, in which instance 

he shall, with his own consent to each assignment, be subject to assignment by the Chief 

Justice of the Supreme Court or by a Presiding 

Judge of any Administrative Judicial District 

to sit in any court of this state of the same dignity, or lesser, as that from which he retired, 

and if in a District Court, under the same rules 

as provided by the present Administrati.ve Judicial Act, and while so assigtxd. shall have all the 

powers of a judge thereof. While assigned to 

said court, such person shall be paid &I amount 

equal to the salary of the judge of said court, in 

lieu of retirement allowance. 

p. 2373 
-’ 

The Honorable Mark W. White, page 3 (H-526) 

It is therefore apparent that a judge who retires and does not 

accept an appointment to sit in a court of this State is not thereafter 

a judicial officer, and has no further duties as a judge. Accordingly, 

it is our opinion that those retired judges who are no longer “judicial 

officers” within section 7 of article 6228b are also not “elected officers” 

under section 2(2) of article 6252-9b and are not subject to its disclosure 

requirements. Of course, were a retired judge to scce~pt an executive 

or legislative office in state government he may be subject to the 

statutory financial disclosure requirements. See Attorney General 

- 

Opinion H-155 (1973). 

However, those judges who continue as judicial officers retain 

duties as judges, and the public policy of the State, as expressed in 

section 1 of 6252-9b, ES, is applicable to the “discharge of [their] 

duties.” Attorney General Opinion H-190 (1973) held, paraphrasing the 

language of the statute, that: 

The courts whose judges are included by 

$2(2)(C) in the definition of ‘Elected officers, ’ 

therefore, are the courts of civil appeals, 

district cmn+s. criminal district courts exercising the jurisdi.ction of district courts, 

courts of domestic relations, juvenile courts 

created by special laws, and any other legislatively created courts, if there are any, which 

exercise district court jurisdiction. : 

A judge who served in one of these courts prior to his retirement,would 

therefore have been an “elected officer” during his term of office. 

Since upon accep&g assignment to a court under section 7A of article 

6228b.a retired judge retains his character as a judicial officer, it is 

our opinion that insofar as a rettred judge serves on one of the c~ourts 

enumerated in H-190 (1973). supra. he comes wi.thin the broad definition 

of “rkcted offi,cer” under secti.on 2(2) of article 6252-913, and in conformity with t,he St,ate’s public policy is subject to the Act’s financial 

reporti.ng requirements. 

p. 2374 
. . - 

The Honorable Mark W. White, page 4 (H-526) 

SUMMARY 

A retired judge who does not accept assignment 

under section 7A of article 6228b is not an “elected 

officer” under article 6252-9b and is not required 

to file financial reports. 

A retired judge who accepts assignment under 

section 7A of article 5228b to one of the courts 

covered by section 2(2) of article 6252-9b, is an 

“elected officer” and must comply with that statute’s 

financial disclosure requirements. 

Very truly yours, 

APPROVED: 

DAVID M. KENDALL, Fi.rst Assistant 

a 

C. ROBERT HEAT:H. Chai.rman 

HILL 

General of Texas 

Opinion Committee 

p. 2375